Cases 171 - 180 of 71,249
SCOTT v. KALLIS et al
as 2:2024cv00089
Plaintiff:
LUKE JOHN SCOTT, SR.
Defendant:
S. KALLIS, WOLF and DIRECTOR OF THE DEPT. OF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
KENDALL et al v. FENI et al
as 1:2024cv00468
Plaintiff:
STEVEN L. KENDALL
Defendant:
A. FENI, A. KENADJI, A. EAGAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CARLISLE v. CARVANA LLC
as 1:2024cv00765
Plaintiff:
JASON CARLISLE
Defendant:
CARVANA LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act
COMBS v. REAGLE et al
as 1:2024cv00517
Plaintiff:
DANNY TYLER COMBS
Defendant:
REAGLE, MAGGIE BRYANT, JACKSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00428
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
CARROLL v. O'MALLEY
as 1:2024cv00430
Plaintiff:
STORMI K. CARROLL
Defendant:
MARTIN J. O'MALLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
YOUNG v. ACLU et al
as 2:2024cv00167
Plaintiff:
MARION L. YOUNG, I
Defendant:
ACLU, KENNETH FAK and GAVIN M. ROSE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BOYKINS v. GILBERT et al
as 1:2024cv00761
Plaintiff:
MAURICE BOYKINS
Defendant:
GILBERT, GORD, UNIT TEAM MANAGER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PERDUE v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2024cv00165
Plaintiff:
JEFFERY K. PERDUE
Defendant:
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ROBERT E. CARTER, JR., DENNIS REAGLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HAIRSTON v. STATE OF INDIANA/INDPLS. et al
as 1:2024cv00753
Plaintiff:
STARR HAIRSTON
Defendant:
STATE OF INDIANA/INDPLS., FISHERS COMMUNITY NORTH HOSPITAL, IPD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
